In the beginning

Quote

"In the beginning" the Earth was created flat and other celestial bodies weren't because............?

Because celestial bodies are not the earth.

But what makes the earth different from the others?

And "In the beginning" the Earth was created flat and other celestial bodies weren't because............?

Again, please aim this to primary school children

Allow me to illustrate the absurdity of this proposition as follows:

Please explain, as you would to a primary school child, why the Sun formed to be very hot and the planets much cooler.

But what makes the earth different from the others?

The earth is not a celestial body. It's something completely different. The earth is a plane which bisects the known universe. The earth is the only known material world and the only environment known to support life.

Quote

But what makes the earth different from the others?

The earth is not a celestial body. It's something completely different. The earth is a plane which bisects the known universe. The earth is the only known material world and the only environment known to support life.

Proof?

Proof?

You want me to prove that the earth is the only environment known to support life? 

nature works in an efficient way. a complete universe for only one populated planet is very unlikely.

Quote

Proof?

You want me to prove that the earth is the only environment known to support life? 

How about proving that "The earth is a plane which bisects the known universe." for starters.  And saying that the FE extends farther than the eye can see does not constitute proof of anything other than the limits of human vision.

Read.  "only known"  as in the only planet we know of to support life, not the only planet.

nature works in an efficient way. a complete universe for only one populated planet is very unlikely.

It's a good thing that the earth is not a planet, then.

How about proving that "The earth is a plane which bisects the known universe." for starters.  And saying that the FE extends farther than the eye can see does not constitute proof of anything other than the limits of human vision.

Whenever I look out my window the earth is observed to bisect my universe.

OH MY GOD xDDDDDDDDDDD

*coughs*

Well, seriously:

- Can you give a proof that the Earth is infinite and bisects the universe? OBJECTIVE PROOF, not your visual impressions.
- Can you give proof that ANY OTHER PLANET is unable to sustain life?

I have time, so feel free. But remember this word:

OBJECTIVE.

OH MY GOD xDDDDDDDDDDD

*coughs*

Well, seriously:

- Can you give a proof that the Earth is infinite and bisects the universe? OBJECTIVE PROOF, not your visual impressions.
- Can you give proof that ANY OTHER PLANET is unable to sustain life?

I have time, so feel free. But remember this word:

OBJECTIVE.

Do you have PROOF the earth is round?

Why do you do like this being a RE'er??? Anyway, this is FES, not RES, I want him to teach me and amuse me and convince, that's the purpose of my staying here. And given that FE'ers don't have a scientific community that can give proof of the roundness, I ask the experts here.

Yes. It's been photographed from high altitude. By many thousands of people, not just the lizard army that runs NASA.

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/discovery-project-earth-balloon-cam-raw.html

Double standard.

FE'er: The Earth looks flat to my own eyes, therefore it must be.
RE'er: You're an idiot.

RE'er: Look at this picture taken from high up where very few people have ever been. The Earth looks round, therefore it must be.
FE'er: That picture is faked.
RE'er: You're an idiot.

Inability to grasp the simple logical argument which explains why the earth appears flat at it's surface.

You're missing my point. My point is that neither argument is valid; you cannot base your conclusions on how something looks.

Yes you can. Christ this really is basic kids geometry.

The earth appears flat because from 6 ft up there is little change in the curvature of the earth. Therefore, from 6ft up it would be hard (but not impossible) to distinguish a flat earth from a round earth.

But the higher up you go the more pronounced the curvature becomes. Until you're looking at a whole planet and Tom is crying and shielding his eyes from The Conspiracy.

A round Earth looks flat up close. Can you prove that a flat Earth would not look round from afar?

Any curvature evident may be from the discs edge viewed at an angle, or from the lighted portion of the earth. I  have yet to see a picture with curvature more consistent with a globe than disc.

Yes.

On a round earth: As the distance away from the earth tends to infinity, the observable area tends to 50%

On a flat earth: As the distance away from the earth tends to infinity, the observable area tends to 100%

We've been through this before...

Prove it, without making any assumptions about how things like light work on a large scale, since you don't like it when Flat Earthers assume that the Earth is flat on a large scale because it looks like it on a small scale.

Look at an orange. (50%)
Look at a pizza. (100%)

Look at an orange. (50%)
Look at a pizza. (100%)

A pizza looks flat up close. So does the Earth. An orange does not. What is your point?

This is my point:

Quote from: Osama  Bin Laden on October 13, 2008, 11:03:17 AM

Quote from: goldstein on October 13, 2008, 09:38:06 AM

Yes you can. Christ this really is basic kids geometry.

The earth appears flat because from 6 ft up there is little change in the curvature of the earth. Therefore, from 6ft up it would be hard (but not impossible) to distinguish a flat earth from a round earth.

But the higher up you go the more pronounced the curvature becomes. Until you're looking at a whole planet and Tom is crying and shielding his eyes from The Conspiracy.

A round Earth looks flat up close. Can you prove that a flat Earth would not look round from afar?

Yes.

On a round earth: As the distance away from the earth tends to infinity, the observable area tends to 50%

On a flat earth: As the distance away from the earth tends to infinity, the observable area tends to 100%

We've been through this before...

Then you said: Prove it.
Here it is.
EDIT: Besides, imagine a living creature in scale of a human but in relation with the size of the orange. This being would percieve the orange as flat just as we doo.

Then you said: Prove it.
Here it is.
EDIT: Besides, imagine a living creature in scale of a human but in relation with the size of the orange. This being would percieve the orange as flat just as we doo.

Prove that light behaves the same on the scale of the Earth as it does on the scale of the Earth.

Don't go that way, because I could ask you to prove that your diagrams work in the reality.
Anyway, at least for me to be able to discuss about the light thing, I would need to know what is the exact form of the light curving, I don't know the mathematical name, but you know, the "angle" of the curve, how much is it? 'Cause I assume it is a constant, and I've observed that "bendy light" is an excuse for everything, maybe knowing the exact form of the curve, we could get something.

Quote from: TheCat on September 19, 2008, 09:33:11 AM

Aha! Now we're getting somewhere!  When the particles started clumping together why did some form round planets and stars but some a flat earth?

It is likely that in the past, Dark Energy was a much more rigid flux, and so the Earth formed as layer upon layer of molten rock was compacted onto itself with nowhere to go due to the inertia of the rock in front of it. It would have accelerated at a phenomenal rate during this early formation; perhaps millions of metres per second per second. As the rigid Dark Energy struck the flat underside of this large cooling disk, a large region in front of it, extending for millions of kilometres, was shielded from the Dark Energy, allowing for spherical bodies to form, most of which plummeted straight into the surface of the Earth. As the initial rigidity of Dark Energy subsided for reasons not fully understood, the acceleration of the Earth slowed and the region that was shielded from Dark Energy began to shrink, until finally the heavens as we know them today were struck by the force of Dark Energy and caused to remain where they were.

Dark Energy is still becoming less rigid and less powerful, so in a few billion years we will likely be accelerating much more slowly, and more of the upper atmoplane will have stopped being shielded from Dark Energy and will escape into space, causing much lower air pressure at the surface. The oceans will eventually evaporate due to low pressure, creating an uncontrollable greenhouse effect and the Earth will overheat before Dark Energy spills over the ice wall and acceleration stops altogether, at which point the Earth will be left to slowly cool and eventually collapse into a sphere.

What is Dark Energy?

Quote from: goldstein on October 13, 2008, 05:55:19 AM

Yes. It's been photographed from high altitude. By many thousands of people, not just the lizard army that runs NASA.

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/discovery-project-earth-balloon-cam-raw.html

Double standard.

FE'er: The Earth looks flat to my own eyes, therefore it must be.
RE'er: You're an idiot.

RE'er: Look at this picture taken from high up where very few people have ever been. The Earth looks round, therefore it must be.
FE'er: That picture is faked.
RE'er: You're an idiot.

Let's forget the "you're an idiot" part, OK?
Are you familiar with pointillism? It's a late 19th century art movement. A pointillist painting, up close, looks like nothing but a bunch of dots. As you back away from it, you can see people, animals, trees... whatever the painter chose as his or her subject. What I'm trying to say is: although something make look a certain way from up close, it can be an entirely different thing from farther away.

Quote from: Kira-SY on October 13, 2008, 10:35:51 PM

Look at an orange. (50%)
Look at a pizza. (100%)

A pizza looks flat up close. So does the Earth. An orange does not. What is your point?

Look at an orange through a 200x microscope and tell me how round it is.

Don't go that way, because I could ask you to prove that your diagrams work in the reality.
Anyway, at least for me to be able to discuss about the light thing, I would need to know what is the exact form of the light curving, I don't know the mathematical name, but you know, the "angle" of the curve, how much is it? 'Cause I assume it is a constant, and I've observed that "bendy light" is an excuse for everything, maybe knowing the exact form of the curve, we could get something.

No answers?
Kay...

Quote from: Kira-SY on October 13, 2008, 10:52:48 PM

Don't go that way, because I could ask you to prove that your diagrams work in the reality.
Anyway, at least for me to be able to discuss about the light thing, I would need to know what is the exact form of the light curving, I don't know the mathematical name, but you know, the "angle" of the curve, how much is it? 'Cause I assume it is a constant, and I've observed that "bendy light" is an excuse for everything, maybe knowing the exact form of the curve, we could get something.

No answers?
Kay...

Be prepared for a very complicated formula, because it does not only bend the light on a vertical plane, it also bends the light in such a way that, during an Equinox, everyone has to see the Sun setting in the West, even though it is really hovering North West of the observer that is not close to the Arctic.

The formula is much more complicated than you have guessed, since air has to be anisotropic and has to have a very small refraction index; otherwise, we would see a rainbow where we would otherwise see a star.

So, let's be clear: bendy light cannot be bent by electromagnetism because we could measure it from Earth; cannot be bent by refraction from the atmosphere's air because the chromatic aberration of the light from every star would be evident; it cannot be because of strong, weak or gravitational forces, so it has to be an unknown force.

Now you know why Robosteve is still working on the formulas. Please wish him luck.

What if I ask for a drawing? I swear I'm a total stupid about numbers, and I want to understand! I want to know the exact shape of the curvature, so a drawing would be great. Don't scare me with the maths 

What if I ask for a drawing? I swear I'm a total stupid about numbers, and I want to understand! I want to know the exact shape of the curvature, so a drawing would be great. Don't scare me with the maths 

The curve is probably in the shape of a parabola, though I am open to similar variants such as a secant curve. It's really not possible to tell the difference with the sort of measuring equipment that we have. I am inclined to suspect that it is indeed a parabola, however, due to the natural simplicity of the shape and the fact that it would be the most compatible with my Sky Mirrors idea. Here is Wikipedia's depiction of what a typical parabola looks like:

Image saved for future references. Thanks so much.
Now, maybe I am the clumsiest guy ever, but I couldn't find a good thread about Sky mirrors, would you mind to link or smth? I'm really interested on reading about it.